Reading mode: Light Dark

Are Sony lens prices objectively supportable?

Go to last post
S

Sherman90

Well-known member
Messages
135
Reaction score
184
Even after all these years, I have a tough time justifying two grand, three grand for a piece of glass. With the same money I could buy a motorcycle, or a top of the line laptop, or three of the latest iPhones, or pay someone to paint my entire home.

I love my photographic gear, but aren't prices a bit ludicrous?
 
...please note that my inquiry is admittedly somewhat rhetorical and maybe even philosophic. I love my Sony glass but I think one the lessons Covid has taught me is the value of money.
 
Sherman90 said:
Even after all these years, I have a tough time justifying two grand, three grand for a piece of glass. With the same money I could buy a motorcycle, or a top of the line laptop, or three of the latest iPhones, or pay someone to paint my entire home.

I love my photographic gear, but aren't prices a bit ludicrous?
Click to expand...
It depends on your budget and usage.

If you're pro getting paid for your shots and the best gear results in higher or more frequent paychecks, it's an investment in your business like any other. We could probably argue about the actual difference between a 24-70mm GM and 24-70mm Sigma, but some people will prefer one over the other.

For others, their personal situation allows for an unlimited budget. When you're not making budget trade-offs, an extra thousand dollars here or there is no issue. Think of those Leica owners who insist that there is something special to justify five-figure cookout photos or a huge markup on rebranded Panasonic compact cameras.

Clearly Sony thinks that there is a market at those prices, and I see those people as subsidizing the R&D for the rest of us!
 
Sherman90 said:
...please note that my inquiry is admittedly somewhat rhetorical and maybe even philosophic. I love my Sony glass but I think one the lessons Covid has taught me is the value of money.
Click to expand...
I try to buy the best for me but not over-buy. I recognize what works for me is not for everyone.

There are lower cost but excellent options available. I don't have the Tamron lenses but they have an excellent reputation. Samyang provides good lenses with varying quality levels but the cost is lower. You don't need G Master lenses to get great results. If those top end lenses are what you want there is nothing wrong with that. Plan for it. Save for it. Then enjoy it stress free.
 
Sherman90 said:
Even after all these years, I have a tough time justifying two grand, three grand for a piece of glass. With the same money I could buy a motorcycle, or a top of the line laptop, or three of the latest iPhones, or pay someone to paint my entire home.

I love my photographic gear, but aren't prices a bit ludicrous?
Click to expand...
A motocycle? Certainly not a new one. Ok sure, a new mini bike can be had for about $1500. But even a new smallish sport bike is going to be about 6K. Even a 450 honda duel Sport is $7600. I know this isn't the point of your post but bikes have gotten crazy spendy. If I were to replace my BMW R1200GS with it's current replacement we're talking 17,895 for the base model plus taxes, title, tags. Don't wanna side track the the thread though. Carry on.
 
The entire photographic industry isn't really supportable! lol

Being serious sure it's an expensive bit of glass, I'm sure a few will buy it. These types of lenses are not big sellers, never have been.

On a wider subject is glass overpriced? It has always been the glass where the highest margins were, even going way back. Are lenses overpriced? I would say so they have increased well above inflation or normal rises over the years

Unfortunately for makers with the MILC mounts, they no longer can keep people stuck to one lens system. Adapters are the enemy of MILC makers, yet they kinda forgot about that one when they started pushing it ;-D
 
Basically I'm just whining because I want a motorcycle but a g master lens keeps getting in the way.

That and I'm pretty sure all camera lenses are rip-offs - that I enjoy.
 
Sherman90 said:
Basically I'm just whining because I want a motorcycle but a g master lens keeps getting in the way.

That and I'm pretty sure all camera lenses are rip-offs - that I enjoy.
Click to expand...
What do you want to get?

Here's my mighty mighty GS



i-pmjkSmS-M.jpg


Started to snow when I was at work. Had a 35 mile commute home in this stuff. Good times



i-LFpPJHS-L.jpg




--
No matter where you go, there you are -Buckaroo Banzai
 
Sherman90 said:
Even after all these years, I have a tough time justifying two grand, three grand for a piece of glass. With the same money I could buy a motorcycle, or a top of the line laptop, or three of the latest iPhones, or pay someone to paint my entire home.

I love my photographic gear, but aren't prices a bit ludicrous?
Click to expand...
It's not a piece of glass, if only making a modern camera lens were that simple.

When you think about the components, the build, the motors, the firmware, the coatings and much much more... there's a lot of work going into each one. And a lot of it is by necessity manual.

But that said I do think that their latest offering (this new 12-24 GM) is bordering slightly on the greedy side (perhaps to make up for recent earnings shortfalls?).

In any case I already own a 16-35 GM and find that I rarely use it (great lens by the way).

I own many of the GM's (see my profile) but $3K for a lens that I'd rarely use is a little too rich even for my blood. And that distortion is excessive IMHO.
 
Sherman90 said:
Even after all these years, I have a tough time justifying two grand, three grand for a piece of glass. With the same money I could buy a motorcycle, or a top of the line laptop, or three of the latest iPhones, or pay someone to paint my entire home.

I love my photographic gear, but aren't prices a bit ludicrous?
Click to expand...
A bit on the side: I don't think prhotographers need so many lenses, and for sure not the brightest for wide, normal and tele, or zoom lenses that cover everything from 12 mm to 600 mm, plus teleconverter at the long end. With a few fine lenses you can even work as a professional.
 
Last edited:
See here .

Three questions usually come up in discussion on prices:

1. Are Sony prices higher than other major brands, when comparing like for like?

2. Are prices in general higher than they were in the past (adjusted for inflation)?

The answer to both these questions is unambiguously no.

3. Are prices 'too high' by some objective measure?

I don't know how to answer that. A different way of asking the same thing is, "are camera and lens manufacturers including a higher profit margin than other comparable products, like other consumer electronics or whatever?"

The answer to that question is also probably no, but I'm sure there will be plenty of tedious ranting about corporate greed, as this topic always generates, and lots of strategic business 'advice' from armchair experts and keyboard warriors. If someone can provide some actual data on the topic rather than opinions then that would be interesting.

Probably more than one person will illuminate the discussion with, "the price is what consumers are willing to pay" - I've said it now so you don't have to.

--
Sharpness scores and other stats for many FE lenses here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4442319
Fairly amateur photography here:
https://www.facebook.com/John-Clark-Photography-1035965476487072/
 
Last edited:
Well, you could take all your photos with an ancient manual focus lens on an adapter.

I'm willing to pay Sony's prices, having seen (from various tear-downs) what's inside their lenses - they are clearly well-made, well-designed, and even beautiful, lenses.

If you would rather spend the money on a motorbike - do so!
 
The price people will pay is the price they can charge.

The 18-135 is a perfect example. Introduced it was high $600 something. It didn't sell well. At $400 something it sells well. At $300 anything it is basically a "must buy". The market will have a big part in dictating price. If you don't want to pay the price, just don't. You'll either find it 2nd hand at a better price or the price will come down. You pay to play if you are an early adopter. The ones who wait typically get the better deals.

I feel the same about the Canon 6d. I got both of mine refurb at $999 which is what I felt was the "right price" for what it was at the time, definitely not the full retail price.
 
For me the main problem with Sony glass is having to spend four figures for a decent first party zoom. Even the Tamron 2.8s are like $900 at the minimum. And 10 years on the adapter situation still sucks. If you are OK with only shooting primes Sony FE becomes a high value system. But I just couldn't pull the trigger on the 24-105 G and by the time the Sigma 2.8 came out I was gone.

$2-3K for top end glass is absolutely justified though and you don't have to buy GM glass. There's plenty of good Sony glass in the $1-2K range.
 
Sherman90 said:
Even after all these years, I have a tough time justifying two grand, three grand for a piece of glass. With the same money I could buy a motorcycle, or a top of the line laptop, or three of the latest iPhones, or pay someone to paint my entire home.

I love my photographic gear, but aren't prices a bit ludicrous?
Click to expand...
My willingness to pay can get pretty high - most was $2300 for the Sony 100-400mm - but I think the value for money on Sony first party lenses have been generally lacking.

Many of the 3rd party options from Zeiss, Sigma, and Tamron are significantly better in one or more important attributes like image quality, cost, and/or size.

Best case in point is the Sigma 24-70mm vs Sony 24-70mm GM - absolutely no good reason to buy the GM version.
 
Sherman90 said:
Even after all these years, I have a tough time justifying two grand, three grand for a piece of glass.
Click to expand...
Why? When you sell these masterpieces you'll get probably a very good part of the investment back - there are very few activities where used gear sells that good. Buy a yacht or a jetplane or a parachute or diving or skiing equipment and your return of investment will be much lower.

Buying lenses is much less of a risk if you buy wisely ;-)
Sherman90 said:
With the same money I could buy a motorcycle, or a top of the line laptop, or three of the latest iPhones, or pay someone to paint my entire home.
Click to expand...
I respectfully disagree - my mid 2020 13.3" rMBP drained my pocket by € 4.6 k :-P
Sherman90 said:
I love my photographic gear, but aren't prices a bit ludicrous?
Click to expand...
Here's my take on that:
  1. In case you can't afford the prices beside other activities in your life it's probably the wrong decision to put that much money into photography
  2. Once you've invested once you can always switch brands, gear and or activities - you'll get a lot of money back after years of using lenses - there is no other activity that is allowing this kind of return except gold and jewels as ,long as you pay the base material price ;-)
  3. It's more a question of age - once you've seen a lot and had a lot of fun photography is the least pricy thing on earth IMHO - other activities like traveling cost one or two magnitudes more of time.
  4. In case you don't have the resources now buy used gear from people who urgently need money and can't wait or buy them piece by piece slowly once the resources allow for further gear.
Photography is financially very lean over time - especially compare to a sports car or a fast boat or skiing - remember - once you've got your skiing equipment the money drains even faster with the lift cost, traveling and accommodation and Après-Ski :-P

For me the joy of spending time in the right light is priceless and probably cheaper than anything else - and you can combine photographing with many other activities when feasible.

Actually I find the Sony lens prices extremely cheap compare to Leica, Hasselblad or Zeiss Otus - yet they ar most of the time on a similar or better level - especially the G(M) lenses
 
I always view the cost of Sony lenses as a general mirrorless camera tax as opposed to anything else.

I don't think I could persuade my wife that a 1635 f/2.8 GM is a worthwhile purchase, no matter what. But most other purchases have been fine.

I have rationalised my camera gear purchases by saying:
  1. I will use this equipment for at least 5 years
  2. I can minimise the cost of ownership by buying used lenses and then reselling them once I'm done with it
  3. I must ensure that a lens has something about it that makes me want to keep it (e.g. loxia sunstar effect)
My original Nikon d3100 was bought for about 700aud and 4 years later, sold for 430aud. My Sony a6000 body, kit lens, 24mm f/1.8z, 50mm f/1.8 oss, 1670 f/4 oss all went through the same process.

While you are right about the initial upfront costs of buying into a system, that holds true for everyone when considering luxury expenses like mirrorless full frame cameras.
 
sportyaccordy said:
For me the main problem with Sony glass is having to spend four figures for a decent first party zoom. Even the Tamron 2.8s are like $900 at the minimum. And 10 years on the adapter situation still sucks. If you are OK with only shooting primes Sony FE becomes a high value system. But I just couldn't pull the trigger on the 24-105 G and by the time the Sigma 2.8 came out I was gone.

$2-3K for top end glass is absolutely justified though and you don't have to buy GM glass. There's plenty of good Sony glass in the $1-2K range.
Click to expand...
The Tamron F2.8s seem to be the cheapest mirrorless option by quite a bit. You don't have to go F2.8 and could always pick up their new superzoom to cut your 17-200mm price down to $1,600. What are you comparing the Tamrons to?
 
We're not talking Leica. Sony offers a range of lenses at a very broad range of price points. There's plenty of decent value below £1000 and FE is a very vibrant ecosystem featuring Sigma, Tamron, very effective, adapted Canon lenses and vintage (MF) lenses. If Sony are happy to charge arm+leg for the 12-24, that's probably because it's easily the best of its type for any system at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top